2014/2015 BA-BHAAO2001U Intellectual Property Rights and Strategy
English Title | |
Intellectual Property Rights and Strategy |
Course information |
|
Language | English |
Course ECTS | 7.5 ECTS |
Type | Mandatory |
Level | Bachelor |
Duration | One Semester |
Course period | Spring |
Timetable | Course schedule will be posted at calendar.cbs.dk |
Study board |
Study Board for BSc in Economics and Business
Administration
|
Course coordinator | |
|
|
Main academic disciplines | |
|
|
Last updated on 20-06-2014 |
Learning objectives | ||||||||||||||||||||||
After completing this course, students should
demonstrate that they can:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Examination | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Course content and structure | ||||||||||||||||||||||
The course will be taught in English
To profit from
investments in innovation, entrepreneurs must not only have a
promising invention, and
define a suitable
market, they must also develop a strategy to protect their
intellectual assets. From the
inception of the
idea through final commercialization, the entrepreneur acts within
a social environment,
developing the
invention, organizing its implementation, and competing on the
market. At each stage,
entrepreneurs are
confronted with the dilemma: how much information to divulge, in
what ways, and to
whom – to fulfill
their objectives: whether exploring the potential of the idea with
friends and colleagues,
seeking financial
support from banks/angels/venture capitalists, hiring suitably
qualified employees,
engaging in
collaboration, and so forth. In all these cases, knowledge of the
alternatives, constraints, and
opportunities
embodied in the strategic exploitation of intellectual property
rights (IPRs) is essential to
entrepreneurial
success. The nascent entrepreneur is also confronted with the
rapidly evolving nature of
i
nternational
intellectual property rights regimes. The challenges of digital
technology for copyrighted
goods, the
consequences of the expanding realms of patentable technologies,
the need to craft a strong
brand, the
challenges of protecting new designs, or licensing or franchising
the rights – complicate IPR
strategic
decision-making. This course aims to elucidate the deeper nature of
these choices by introducing
students to the
vexing dilemmas they will face – such as, for example: under what
circumstances might it
enhance
profitability to refrain from enforcing IPRs? to use secrecy? to
focus efforts on coming first to
the market? – and
to provide students with IPR tools they can use in their quest for
entrepreneurial
success.
Content
The IPR challenges
facing the entrepreneurial start-up are the focus of this course.
Students will form
groups focusing on
specific entrepreneurial projects, and use these as part of
the learning process. The
course follows IPR
dilemmas and choices through the following three
stages.
•
Creativity and Entrepreneurial
Opportunity:
How can entrepreneurs know
best to move
forward with their
creative flashes while minimizing the chances that their ideas are
copied? How
can entrepreneurs
decide how best to reveal information about their inventions to
potential
business partners?
What IPR instruments which can be used to these ends? For
would-be
entrepreneurs
currently employed in a company: What IPR issues arise as part of
their
considerations to
leave the firm and create a new venture?
• From Drawing Board to Development: How do IPR issues affect entrepreneur contracting for capital with angel investors or with venture capitalists? Given that entrepreneurs in the beginning may lack manufacturing know-how, how can they best cooperate with other firms and maintain/enhance their proprietary rights? Given the rise of digital technologies, when might open access be a preferred option?
•
Progression This course builds on the courses of the previous three semesters, in particular “Innovation Economics and Management,” and “Law.” |
||||||||||||||||||||||
Teaching methods | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Teaching will consist of a combination of lectures, class discussions, cases and simulations building on perspectives from the readings along with practical examples from business. In class, students will discuss promising entrepreneurial projects and address the intellectual property issues that arise in each stage of the entrepreneurial enterprise. Cases and negotiation simulations will enable student identification of the various real-life options, including the changing role of IPRs, and how these might be resolved. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Expected literature | ||||||||||||||||||||||
· Apke, T. M. 1998.
Acquisition and licensing of intellectual property",
Managerial Law, 40 (6), 5-15.
· Beverland, M. B., Napoli, J. and Farrelly, F. 2010. Can all brands innovate in the same way? A Typology of brand position and innovation effort. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27: 33-48. · Cusumano, M. A. 2013. Technology strategy and management: The Apple-Samsung lawsuits. Communications of the ACM, January, 56 (1): 28-31 (case). · Davis, L 2008. Licensing strategies of the new intellectual property vendors, California Management Review. Winter 2008 (February): 6-26. · Davis, L. 2006. Why do small high-tech firms take out patents, and why not? in Andersen, B., ed. Intellectual Property Rights: Innovation, Governance and the Institutional Environment (London: Edward Elgar), 148-176. · Edvinsson, L 1996. Developing a model for managing intellectual capital. European Management Journal 14 (4), August, 356-364. · Fisher, W.W. and Oberholzer-Gee, F. 2013. Strategic management of intellectual property: an integrated approach. California Management Review 55 (4), Summer, 157-183. · Gangadharan, G., D’Andrea, V., Paoli, S., Weiss, M. 2012. Managing license compliance in free and open source software development; Information Systems Frontiers, 14 (2), 143-154 · Gans, J.S., Stern, S. 2003. The product market and the market for ‘ideas’: commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs. Research Policy 32(2): 333-350. · Gemser, G., Jacobs, D. and Ten Cate, R. 2006. Design and competitive advantage in technology-driven sectors: The role of usability and aesthetics in Dutch IT companies. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 18 (5), December, 561-80. · Hornick, J. and Roland, D. 2013. 3D printing and intellectual property: Initial thoughts. The Licensing Journal, August, pp. 12-16. · Lemper, T.A. 2012. The critical role of timing in managing intellectual property; Lemper, Timothy A., Business Horizons, 2012, 55 (4), 339-347 · MacQueen, H., Waelde, C., Laurie, G and Brown, A. 2010. Contemporary Intellectual Property Law and Policy (Oxford University Press). · Morkel, A. and Willoughby, K. 1992. Orbital Engine Corporation, 15 pages(case). · Pagnattaro, M. A. 2012, Preventing know-how from walking out the door in China: Protection of trade secrets, Business Horizons, 55(4), 329-337. · Peters, T., Thiel, J and Tucci, C.L. 2013. Protecting growth options in dynamic markets: The role of strategic disclosure in integrated intellectual property strategies. California Management Review, 55 (4), Summer, 121-142. · Rivette, K.G. and Kline, D. 2000. Discovering new value in intellectual property, Harvard Business Review, January-February, 54-66. · Wilson, S. and Kambil, A. 2008. Open source: salvation or suicide? Harvard Business Review. April: 33-44 (case) |